Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-14-2013 Historic Preservation Commissionr IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, November 14, 2013 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J Harvat Hall 5:15 p.m. A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Certificate of Appropriateness 1. 704 Ronalds Street (demo. existing rear porch, build new addition, remodel kitchen) 2. 520 N. Gilbert Street (demo, of front porch) 3. 1025 E. Burlington Street (replace metal roofing, chimney demo.) 4. 500 Clark Street (one-story rear addition with basement, new screen porch, new deck) E) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff F) Discuss Annual Historic Preservation Awards G) Consideration of Minutes for October 10, 2013 — HPC Meeting H) Adjournment Staff Report November 8, 2013 Historic Review for 704 Ronalds Street District: Broom Street Historic District. Classification: Contributing The applicants, Richard Finley and Wendy Scholz, are requesting approval for an addition project at 704 Ronalds Street, a Contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The proposed project consists of a one-story addition and porch on the rear of the house. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines 5.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Additions 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint Staff Comments This turn -of -the -century house has an asymmetrical form, and a steeply hipped roof with lower cross gables — a front gable on the south, and side gables on the east and west. The form is a holdover from the Victorian Queen Anne style; the classical details make this house a `free classic' variant of the style. While modest compared to more ornate Queen Anne houses, this house is a good example of local vernacular architecture. This is a 1-1/2 story house with original brick foundation and wood clapboard siding. The front porch, which had been enclosed, is now restored. A picture of this house was included in Aurner's 1912 History of johnron County, vol. 2. It was the home of attorney Edward Sulek. The house today looks very much the same as then. The project consists of a one-story addition and porch on the rear of the house. The addition will measure 11' 6" x 25' 0" with an 8' 0" x 15' 0" porch. The project includes demolition of the existing 6' 0" x 19' 0" addition on the rear of the house. The project also includes a larger window opening on the east side of the house at the existing kitchen. There will be an unfinished full basement under the new addition. Proposed materials include cedar siding to match existing; frieze and bedmold, corner boards, and water table all to match existing; exposed concrete foundation painted to match existing painted brick foundation; and asphalt shingles to match existing. Materials for the new porch include traditional fir floor boards, and bead board ceiling. The addition will have Marvin Ultimate wood double -hung windows, with wood combination storms. The guidelines for Additions emphasize the importance of preserving the character and features of the historic house, while designing an addition that is both compatible with and distinguished from the historic house. In the proposed project, this is accomplished with the placement of the addition at the back of the house; with the selection of materials and products similar to those of the historic house; and with the alignment of key horizontal lines between the old and the new, such as window heads, window sills, and the water table. The applicant's intent is to build an addition that is distinguishable from the historic house, while maintaining continuity with the architectural style and character. To achieve this, the material and product choices are all appropriate, but a concern shared by applicant and staff is that the massing of the addition and shape of the proposed roof creates a design that is out of character with this nicely proportioned Queen Anne house. The design submitted with the application has a low -pitch hip roof over the addition and porch. An alternate design from staff with revised massing and roof design has been presented to the applicant and is included with this report. The advantage of the revised design is that it adds height to the main area of the addition, and the proportions and details of the front porch are replicated on the rear porch. Another advantage is that the addition will not overlap the existing northeast corner of the house - the revised design preserves the original east wall and corner trim. In Staffs opinion, the design of this addition is generally acceptable. The problem with the massing of the addition and shape of the proposed roof must be resolved and a final design should be reviewed and approved by Chair and staff. The proposal to demolish the existing rear addition is acceptable; and the proposal to replace the existing kitchen window is acceptable. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 704 Ronalds Street as presented in the application, with the following condition: Provide final design, including roof design, for review and approval by Chair and staff. t • 'Q f r iL j 1 yl J I r nairri►sfl►' Will I#11l, RESIDENCE OF EDWARD SULER Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 144C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/HPhandbook For Staff Use: Date submitted: 9 / 6 / 13 ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Major review ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the PCD Office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant information T -E/ {Pleax chat# pn®xv oo®tnet pe�sam) PmpertyOwnerName: __ Richard Finle and Wendy Scholz Email: wsscholz@gmail.com Phone Number: ( 319) S94-3214 Address: 704 Ronalds Street City: Iowa City State: IA zip Code: 52245 ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: Stephan Boda Email: Stephan(rDartisanrenovationinc.com Phone Number: (612 ) 819-4333 Address: 4627 Pillsbury Avenue City: Minneapolis State: MN zip Code: 55419 Proposed Project Information Address: 704 Ronalds Street. Iowa City IA 52245 Use of Property: Residential Date Constructed (if known): 1900 Historic Designation (A1aps are located in the Hatau: Preaar,rehon Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR ,_/ �f This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: g Contributing 0 Noncontributing 11 Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. App ' tions without necessary materials may be rejected. Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) ❑ Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Other: Please contact the Preservation Planner at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with application. Proposed Project Details Project Description: Demo existing 1970's era three season back porch and adjoining bathroom (dimensions G x 19') in back of home. Build in same location new main floor addition to include full bath, mud room/ entry area, kitchen eating nook-, and closets. emo e s era existing kitchen. Full unfinished baerrrrrt Addition will include an op- por-` _Materials (General):We will remove all historically inaccurate materials from previous remodels: vinyl flooring, atypical moulding, modern cabinetry, aluminum storms, etc.... All new materials will match existing. I his includes fabricating any new moulding knives to match trim original to house. Ali windows wo" be tqal Yin Uotmate Double I lung (wood) with wood =nbinatioi. sto, ins. Materials to be Used: Exterior: Siding to match existing 4 1/2" reveal cedar. Corner boards to match existing Porch will have traditional fir floor boards and bead board ceiling. Exterior frieze, water table and bed moulding to match existing. Asphalt shingles to match. Comrete foundation painted to matt the existing brick I- -_ J% Exterior Appearance Changes: Current back porch will be replaced with an addition approximately the same shape but double the size, with the addition of a bump -out on the east (non -street) side. Design and materials use wi make it such that the addition is distinguishable trorn the original historic structure but n tail Itail.b L01 161 113ky with the style a, id cl ia, acte, of the existing I ion ie.The oi ily cha, ege we wis! to makes to the main -trurtnrP art frorn the arlrlition) is to rpplarP the one -mall window in ��ni Lp cW on�with twm.o. larger but historically appropriate windows.This is on the east (non -street side of the -home. Sl- d v I r I i I I I I I d 9 \w ��� �� j � ��� i '. i � ;: Staff Report November 8, 2013 Historic Review for 520 N. Gilbert Street District: Northside Historic District Classification: Contributing The applicants, Carole Eldeen and Matthew Eldeen, are requesting approval for demolition of a significant feature at 520 N. Gilbert Street, a Contributing property in the Northside Historic District. The project consists of the demolition of the front porch, and repair of the brick wall above the front door. AR licable Regulations and Guidelines 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.8 Masonry 7.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features Staff Comments According to Site Inventories, this house is architecturally significant, the work of a master mason, and potentially eligible for individual listing in the National Register. Built c.1865. Straight saw marks, square headed nails, and 18-inch-plus wide roofing planks are indicators of this early construction date. The builder may have been Henry Seevogel, a prominent stone and brick mason and contractor who worked in Iowa City and surrounding communities. Seevogel owned this property from 1869 to 1873. The house is described as Italianate, 1-1/2 stories, the walls are built of common -bond brick, the roof is a side gable, and there are crown chimneys at each end. This is a central hall, two room deep plan configuration, with kitchen added on the back. The front fayade is symmetrical, with a central door flanked by two windows left and right. Projecting brickwork over the windows creates the appearance of curved window hoods. The door has the same ornamental brickwork. The front porch, which was probably added later, was also Italianate style. It had slender square columns set on brick piers, a shallow hip roof, cornice with dentils, and filigree design wood brackets. The porch was severely damaged by vandalism a year ago, and the applicants removed all remaining portions of it; they are now proposing that the porch remain removed, rather than restored. The proposed project consists of the front porch demolition, repair of the brick wall above the front door, and installation of a light fixture over the door. The applicants have completed most of the brick repair, and are planning to paint the area of exposed brick. The Guidelines for Demolition disallow removing any historic feature, such as a porch, that is significant to the architectural character and style of the building. The guidelines recommend saving and storing on site any historic features that are removed from a building. The Guidelines for Masonry emphasize the importance of making repairs with materials and methods that match existing; especially important is the use of soft lime mortar in masonry repair. The circumstances of this case are unfortunate. Whether or not the front porch was original to the house, it had been there for over a hundred years and had certainly acquired historic significance. In staffs opinion, repair and restoration of the porch is preferable to demolition, but the applicants' proposal to remove the porch is acceptable, based on the reasonable assumption that the porch was added later and there was a time when the building looked like this. Looking at the building without the porch, the symmetry and balance of the design is more evident, and the craftsmanship of the mason is more easily seen. Losing the porch is unfortunate, but without it the building remains architecturally significant, and true to its style. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 520 N. Gilbert Street, as presented in the application. Ali ri 4-) rd tm 44 Q) 44 0 r- or. 641 A.ppUcation for Historic Review Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or For Staff use: properties located in a historic district or conservation district Date submitted: /o pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 144C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and ❑ Certificate ofNo material Effect regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness MajPreservation Handbook which is available in the PCD office ❑ ❑ interinter review mediate review at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/HPhandbook ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the PCD office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information (Pleam check pn=y person / 1 ❑ Property Owner Name: _ Crp-e�b u. � 0- Eiwic,,i azz L-y\ Email: ts*A%rllk IAI4A Phone Number: (311) skk\'%0-S3 Address: �ON S S City: _= C State: 11=�— Zip Code: S ZT-Lk S ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: 1k7tFFi",I CCf� Email: Phone Number: (3)y) Address: City: State: Zip Code: Proposed Project Information Address: `EZ. ® ti B {ZmA I I) y T- ST Use of Property: Date Constructed (if known): orle (Maps nee ) in dw HDesignation PPresavation Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR ❑ This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District P Northside Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: V Contributing ❑ Noncontributing ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District 0 Nonhistoric Appmcation Regwements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. ❑ Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ 'Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) ❑ Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans Y Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Other: ❑ Product Information Please contact the Preservation Plainer at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with application. Proposed Project Details Project Description: R.pAkt Ac gT��caL��©��c 01�1 FRaI� Materials to be Used: -4�>-kzIC1L, tl"'op—`tok- Exterior Appearance Changes: VIA ON t= ppdadmin&s#ndapp_for_historicmim.doc 12111 Staff Report November 8, 2013 Historic Review for 1025 E. Burlington Street District: College Hill Conservation District Classification: Contributing The applicant, Mark Norton, is requesting approval for a proposed re -roofing project at 1025 E. Burlington Street, a Contributing property in the College Hill Conservation District. The project consists of new metal roofing and the removal of an existing chimney. Atinlicable Regulations and Guidelines 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.2 Chimneys 4.7 Mass and Rooflines 7.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features Staff Comments Built c.1900, this is a one story Late Victorian house with hipped roof and cross gable dormers on the front and sides. There is a hip roof wall dormer on the back. The roofing is standing seam teme coated metal. The siding on the house is wood clapboard; the gable dormers have fish scale shingle siding. The full width front porch has been enclosed and finished with stucco. The exposed portion of the foundation has been parged. There are two brick chimneys: one toward the back of the house, and one toward the front. The chimneys are either on the central roof ridge, or slightly off. In 2004, Certificates of Appropriateness were issued for replacement of the double -hung windows in the front and side gables. In 2006, the Commission approved a plan to replace the existing metal roofing with new standing seam metal roofing. The work was not done, and in 2007 a proposal to re -roof with asphalt shingles rather than new metal roofing was presented to the Commission. This proposal was withdrawn at the HPC meeting and the applicant agreed instead to use a protective coating on the existing metal roofing. At this time, the applicant is again proposing to replace the existing metal roofing with new metal roofing. The proposed product is a low rib metal panel. The proposed work also includes removal of the existing brick chimney located toward the back of the house. The applicant has also noted the need to repair deteriorated soffits. Regarding the chimney, it appears to be original and the Guidelines recommend preserving historic chimneys. The Guidelines disallow removal if the chimney is significant to the architectural character and style of the building. On this house, this chimney is not a prominent feature. It is deteriorated and not functional, and in staffs opinion removal is acceptable. Regarding the new metal roofing, it must be noted that the proposed low rib product will have a significantly different appearance compared to the existing standing seam metal roofing. The existing standing seams are spaced approximately 18-inches on center and the panels are flat. The low rib product has smaller ribs that are spaced closer together, and there is corrugation between the ribs. The low rib panels are 36-inches wide, with ribs at 9-inches on center. The low rib product is more typical of agricultural buildings. Assuming this project will include full or partial replacement of the roof sheathing, (similar to the 2006 proposal), the Commission may allow replacement, but require the more traditional standing seam metal roofing that more closely resembles the existing metal roofing. Another option would be asphalt shingles. The Guidelines state that if quality replacement cannot be obtained, then metal roofs should be replaced with high -quality wood shingles or with asphalt shingles. It is likely this house had wood shingles originally, and the Guidelines recommend using asphalt shingles that resemble the texture and color of weathered wood shingles. While the Guidelines recommend maintaining existing metal roofs, there is an exception for replacement. Per the exception, on a case -by -case basis, the Commission may consider allowing replacement of metal roofs with an approved alternative material if documentation is provided to establish evidence of need and of efforts to repair existing damage. In this case the existing metal roofing is definitely in poor condition and replacement is a reasonable course of action. In staff's opinion, the Commission should allow replacement of the existing metal roofing. Asphalt shingles would also be appropriate and acceptable Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 1025 E. Burlington Street, as presented in the application, with the following conditions: • Confirm product selection for new metal roofing, or shingle roofing, for review and approval by Chair and staff. • Any repair of soffits and trim must be with wood or approved wood substitutes. r t Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 144C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook; which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/HPhandbook For Staff Use: Date submitted: 10 ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Major review ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the PCD office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) ❑ Property Owner Name: tA6y k tic r k-G'+ Email: Phone Number: (315 Address: R73 IV!/M«tJ4 P,r jc City: State: -r-A Zip Code: SZ 2Y 6 ❑ Contractor/Consultant Name:DA'Jis ('wnd.ti Email: Address: 2 9 2 b 7 N Sl` City: 3lw—Aa (i Phone Number..(01 ) 20t-6�-03 State: 'PA Zip Code: S 2 537 Proposed Project Information Address: 102-15- E- Use of Property: I( nt- [-( Ha I -le— Date Constructed (if known): / 61 o0 Historic Designation (Maps are located in the Historic Preservation Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR ❑ This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Sued Conservation District College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: Contributing 0 Noncontributing 0 Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. ❑ Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. Ifthe project is a miter alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Other: Please contact the Preservation Planner at 356.5243 for materials which need to be included with application Proposed Project Details Project Description: N1k(t ImntQ FJ' CVL Vtcv 4,., �hr s-vec-' Fr� k CR;-Ncr O'd .J 'IS'. Materials to be Used: rnc.-�.l (�aY Exterior Appearance Changes: r [ter Ppdmt^ftSWWW-ftKJ St0n=viM.doc /�i U+l ••'� LI C •'7 �(�•'{ t^fKh.rte t1� tvtt Low Rib Panel Color Chart CUMUGM, PMredbyValspare We0wX- te&wlogy All colors meet ENERGY STAR® requirements for steep slope roofs. Available in 26 and 29 gauge Note: Digital versions of our colors are approximations of our metal colors. Please ask for a printed color chart or an actual metal sample for color matching purposes. Rustic Gray Alamo (Td. h N p. only) Cnrnsan - , — —El Gold (29 ga, ony) Tan 1 L Lt Stone OU711 Gollc'•r Black (29 ga. only) Hunter Burnished SW Taupe 29g: Brilliant (G90 galvanized)/ Arctic (Galvalume) 26g: Brilliant (Galvalume) I Panel-Loc Panel-Loc Plus PanekL produced In Lm ll Plant only. longer lead times may apply. 36" s6" I 1 + Kynar Contact salesperson for accurate orikino. 0 Color variation between orders is normal and not a cause for rejection. Panels manufactured in Copper Metallic must be installed in the same direction. See directional arrows or stokers provided on your panels. All colors carry a 40 year limited paint warranty. See warranty sheets for warranty criteria. Paint for all colors is provided byva I S pa r ' isatrademarkof CENTRALSTATERMANUFACIVMNG, INC. "ha.- j -�I ':l'1J1 Burgundy Ivory (29 ga. ony) Copper Metallic +0 CENTRAL STATES MANUFACTURING, INC. METAL BUILDING COMPONENTS WWW.CENTRALSTATESMFG.COM Ridge Caps (RCP) (RC2) 4 Painted Side\ Gable Trim x. (GTE s' Painted Side Double Angle A Painted Side (DAI) r. / ,• I Universal Side Wall Painted Side (SFI) / 9' I —a• —I Sa Overhead Door Jamb 7.125" (OBDJ) w'I z• y I Tre I Painted Side / Overhead Door Jamb 9.2511 (O]IDJ9) �I IM l I na• I Painted Side Ridge Cap Track Cover Post Trim 1.5 x 3.5 1.5 x 5.5 1.6 x 7.5 Gambrel Trim Upper:(GTU) Lower:(GTL) Painted Side T Upper Lower I—�—I Mini Corner v (MCRN) Rake & Corner yr (COR) 'I' I L mu Painted Side i a4: —I Rat Guard Painted Side (RG) (11I / l l ``j Universal I Painted Side End Wall / (FF) i QX• Post Trims (SA 312) (SA 512) T1j"JL (SA 714 1W1 4f 14d Painted Side Gutter (K5G206) 99ie•I IIII— sou--�� Drip Cap/ / Ratl Base Soffit Trim Guard J- Trim 2012 Sidewall Flash Gable Base Soffit (GBl) _,aPr- J l. 2,d w' `Painted Side Residential Rake Trim aw Iwl Painted Side �«�• Round Track Covers (CTC) Painted Side $° (DCI) 4 a•Ari '-1'i / wv w Fascia 2y (FT) �� Painted Side 1 / Single Angles (SA 112) (SA 2X2) (SA 3X3) ATh. A � Vss 2" `Paivted Side Aluminum Soffit* Vented (VS 12) Solid (SS 12) Painted Side ,s Inside Overhead Angle Trim Corner Door Jamb 1.5 x 1.5 2x2 3x3 (Residential Eave Trim T r Painted Side ' Inside Comer (ICl) %Iki; Painted Side / J-Trim ( 2W I I Painted Side Drip Edge (RDC) Painted Side -1k'- zw /a. VTl Valley Paint t � / 8 Beaded Fascia (BFT)* I2• 12. qi I2• / ,h Painted Side Rake/ Gable Trim Endwall Plash Eave Trim/ Gutter Rat/Base Guard vay by location. CENTRAL STATES MANUFACTURING, INC. Panel-LoCm and Panel-Loc Plus — Installation Guidelines General Installation Instructions Before beginning panel installation, make sure that structure is square. Failure to do this may result in improper sealing of panels at side lap. Moist or green lumber is not recommended, as panels can react negatively to the moisture from green lumber. Moist lumber may also cause fasteners to back out. Central States recommends the following tools for on -site shearing of metal panels: Electric nibblers, manual hand shears, and profile shears. Friction saws and abrasive discs should not be used to cut panels. In order to prevent corrosion, loose shavings should be removed from roof surface immediately. Also, to prevent trapped moisture on panels remember to remove leaves, dirt, or other debris after installing roof. Fastening Always use a cover sheet if you are predrilling fastener holes. This will prevent hot shavings from sticking to panels. Do not predrill more than one panel at a time, as this will cause shavings to become embedded in interior panels. For optimal results, use a 1-1/2" wood screw* with washer in the flat of the panel (See Illustration 1). Drive the fasteners at every purlin so that it is compressed firmly against the metal. Be cautious not to overdrive the fastener, causing a dimple that can collect water, create rust, and leak. If a fastener missed a purlin, remove, and use caulk or stitch screw to fill hole. * Screw length will change depending on the material under the panel. Roofing Panel -Lod'' and Panel-Loc P1usm are not recommended on roof pitches less than 3:12. When splicing panels for longer lengths, al.l For eaves, ridges, and endlaps 71 For intermediate purlins overlap panels 6". When installing panels against forceful wind, the first sheet should be installed along the eave farthest away from the direction of the wind. Side laps should face away from wind (See Illustration 2). Overhang panels 2" at the eave to allow for a drip edge, and remember to use a closure at the eave and ridge to prevent infestation at the openings. Rake trim should be applied to protect panels against forceful winds. Rake trim will also provide a finished appearance. To prevent leakage on the ridge, use a minimum of 13" coverage on the ridgecap. Apply fasteners on ridge cap at every rib to ensure proper stability. Fasten rake every 2 feet. Butyl tape is recommended along the rake to prevent leakage. or Apply 30 lb. felt paper over shingles before installing metal panels Apply 30 lb. felt paper over decking before installing metal panels or Maximum purlin spacing 2' on center Siding Use comer trim, base molding, eave trim, and other trim to improve the weather -tightness and appearance of the structure. See Light Gauge product guide for load tables and UL ratings. Buyer is responsible for adhering to all applicable code requirements for the area, checking all measurements, and determining suitability of product for each specific project. CSNU is not responsible for any implied warranties. Lowell, AR Cedar Hill, TX Michigan City, IN Jasper, AL 800-356-2733 800-210-8305 800-638-2565 866-270-6608 k § 7 ) Staff Report November 8, 2013 Historic Review for 500 Clark Street District: Clark Street Conservation District Classification: Contributing The applicants, Maeve Clarke and Jodi Tate, are requesting approval for a proposed addition project at 500 Clark Street, a contributing property in the Clark Street Conservation District. The project consists of a one- story addition with basement, a new screen porch, and a new deck. Atrnlicable Regulations and Guidelines 5.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Additions 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint 5.2 Decks and Ramps Staff Comments Built ca. 1900, (listed by the Iowa City Assessor as 1910), this is a simple folk/vernacular style side -gabled, two-story house. The house was originally closer to Clark Street and was moved sometime after 1933; the lot was divided and a new house (ca. 1950) was built in front, facing Clark Street. In 2007, the Historic Preservation Commission approved plans to add a two-story addition to the rear; this work also included re- siding the entire house. In 2008, the Historic Preservation Commission approved plans for construction of a new two -car garage. In 2012, the Commission approved plans for a new front porch. The proposed project consists of a one-story addition with basement, a new screen porch, and a new deck. The addition will be located on the east -facing rear side of the house, with the deck on the east side of the addition, and the screen porch on the south side of the addition. Plan dimensions are 17' 10" x 24' S" for the addition, 8' 7" x 15' 5" for the deck, and 12' 0" x 12' 2" for the screen porch. The addition is offset from the existing house — the walls and outside corners that define the massing of the existing house are preserved. The roof over the addition and porch will be a gable with 7/12 pitch, with a cross -gable facing east; a lower pitched cross -gable connects to the side of the house, below the second floor windows. Proposed materials for the addition include poured -in -place concrete foundation; fiber cement board smooth -finish lap siding and trim; asphalt shingles; and aluminum gutters and downspouts. Windows will be Jeld Wen Tradition Plus (or equal) clad wood windows; doors will be Jeld Wen Siteline (or equal) dad wood swinging patio doors. Proposed materials for the screen porch and deck include concrete foundation piers; pressure -treated wood framing; cedar headers, posts, railing and skirting, to be finished with paint or opaque stain; black metal screening; and Trex composite decking. Dimensions and details of the railing and skirting will match the new front porch on the west side of the house. The guidelines for Additions emphasize the importance of preserving the character and features of the historic house, while designing an addition that is both compatible with and distinguished from the historic house. In the proposed project, this is accomplished with the placement of the addition at the back of the house; with the selection of materials and products similar to those of the existing house; and with the alignment of the water table trim, which is a dominant horizontal line on this house. The guidelines recommend porch design in a style that is consistent with the style of the house. In this case, matching the design of the new front porch is most appropriate. Overall, this is a well -designed project which meets the requirements of the guidelines. Staff recommends approval by the Commission. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 500 Clark Street, as presented in the application. H 1I1111111111 Application for Historic Reveev► Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Hanaibooly which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/]HPhandbook For Staff Use: Date submitted: /0 /?-5/ 13 ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Majorreview ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the PCD office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information (Phac dwck pnmary contact person) ❑ Property Owner Name: /ldkart; LlrY14L-0 Jorari %-ATE Email: MAe vec @ Mck 5 i • c&m Phone Number: (311 2X I -a1741 Address: 5'OD CL*R-I< 57- City: -IOWA Gl TZI ,14 State: Zip Code: S2240 ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: -_ - / +m Fii 4ckg72 Email• Ramdti p+e6y e h • cmm Phone Number. (31 1) R 7.2 - gri -7 S Address: " VJ. J A-acs oa SIT& . 5vt r£ 339 city: CNt ut!?e site: IL- Zip Code: (9660¢ Proposed Project Information Address: qhb< ST- Useofproperty:_RZIMM2y AE5/tAC1dC( Date Constructed( if known): Historic Designation MMain are located m the Historic Ponervuion Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR ❑ This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Nortbside Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District Clark Sttect Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District b Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: JY Contributing 0 Noncontributing 0 Nonhistodc Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please inchide all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. AddiWon (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs �( Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Alteration (Typically Projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement skyhgbts, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacemeaVconsnacken, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, Photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑Mmolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) ❑ Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans ❑ Rao& or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Product Information ❑ 'Other: Please contact the preservation Plainer at 356-5243 for materials which need w be included with application. Proposed Project Details Project Description: AiIJ_ E_S7Dn4 AVMTTDn/ WITi+ r3P4EMW'T; MEW SG2eL-7V PoRGit NEW &refer• Materials to be Used: gAV4;rl6 PIAWK 4IrnW6 TillM MoAvLD5 WotSn 0Uy8i,9-Hv1r6 WIKgfErs WCvt eA-5etbENT witypy)-rs, Win AWMId(e wiO;yrW Wes% 411. f 5W1At61Al6 P*Fzo t'>VMZ5 CEr)*R TRIM AN-> RPrI uu& F6rt_ SGREbK� T)2ax CoMPOSIT,z —' 1TEU�►N6 Exterior Appearance Changes: ` (>Vrf10A( m GE &PMG AW TD F A04 of Wd> Vn! 0As1- S12�) ScRr�k� Poi2cH DrF- R-Dinnonl TO SVVZtl Q ' J&7W? D/2- rYno,tM �d,d raa�a�_ror tdalor cm ew.dw tvu O H S. 0 N N mO ......_..... _� W I11 J F \ U Up N las tlV3N`Oi03N U rc WaU pUQ NO3 WOO KN._ O O J IL °m i I r - 1 s u �o o�1 J N p N �p O waa aoar - w x a , `o 8� W 0 F N �o zo o� �+ N F N pN NaQ YW} JZU UW 0a ONE OWO OK" n o iO _______________ L F&F0 n g iSpu F R Z �1I ___I ____________'- J \ I IL. ¢ ! O lu f � O eE • o I ---------.... ---------------- WW J F- Q Q U� N zO O't rN H N .O� YW} HUH JZU UW OQ om; Owo N0— WW J F- Qa UD N z 0 F a W J W F N a W 0 W QI O a 0 a V�, z Ili L11 [j) 0 O HardiePlank Lap Siding jam"Ifardie Products / Exterior / HardiePlank® Lap Siding http://www jameshard , nm/homeowner/products_siding_hardieplankL... 500 Clark Street New Siding @ addition HardiePlank® lap siding is the most popular brand of siding in America and can be found on over 5.5 million homes. With its strength, beauty and durability, HardiePlank® siding enhances and protects homes in all kinds of climates —and now, with the HardieZone® System, James Hardie provides siding with specific performance attributes relative to the climate where the product is being used. James Hardie now gives you the optimum siding for your home and climate, regardless of location. All HardiePlank® lap siding comes in a variety of looks and textures, all of which are engineered for climate. We are so sure about how well the HardieZone system will perform, HardiePlank® lap siding comes with a 30-year nonprorated, transferable, limited warranty —our strongest warranty ever. 'r1LRAWY MIALUIMIT rv.a Your zip code has been saved as: 52240 Change your location:52240 no C+ The above HaMW7.one Products are suited for your local climate. Learn more. Thickness: 5/16" fight: 2.3 !bsdaq. M1 Lengt : us d ] bC 5.250' 6.250" B1, 6 -.r a 4.01' 5.0" 6.0" To' Click here to view all products. Color Palette This product is not available m ColorPlus® colors in this area. 1 of 10/15/2012 1:50 PM HardiePlank Lap Siding { htip://www.jameshardi, im/homeowner/products_ siding_hazdieplankL... Smooth Lap Siding 611 Oakland Ave - New Siding @ Thickness: 5/18" exterior wall n[nWglMailgayhatp 23r1bt.asn./sksq. tG 9250.12..0 8.0" 1075 •, Thickness: 5/16" Color Palette Weight: 2.31bsJsq. ft. • ■■■ Length: 12' planks IN '.� :+: 5.250" 6.250" Z250" .250' —,--: .._ 'r 4.0" 5.0" 8.0" .0" Siding at 1st Floor & above - to match siding exposure at existing house, match color. This product is not available in ColorPlus® Thickness: 6/16" colors in this area. Weight: 2.3 lbs./sq. ft. Length: 12' planks Siding below trim band @ 1st Floor 1•: F11.02,50"1 12.001r' & below - to match existin concrete g 10.75" block coursing at existing house, match color mlillH Thickness: 5/16" Color Palette wt+ght 2.31tsJsq. ft r �� Len Its .rcrne 8.250" —•I1 kK�rar. V Thickness: 5118" Color Palette Length: 123 I Is./sq. ft. 7.0" ■■■■.■■ Copyright 2012 Contact Us I Terms & Conditions' Privacy Policy I Careers Mobile Site James Hardie Building Products, Inc 2 of 10/15/2012 1:50 PM HardieTrim http://www.jamesll - '4e.com/homeowner/products_trim_hardietrim.py Products / Exterior / HardieTrim@ Boards r'. F Our fiber cement trim adds the finishing touches to a beautiful, lasting James Hardie homes, and are all engineered for climate, so you get the right siding for your home no matter how harsh the weather is where you live. HardieTrim® boards provide unmatched durability and allow you to create a variety of design possibilities for trim, gables, corners, fascia, windows, doors, column wraps, rakes, friezes, decorative trim and other non-structural architectural elements. HardieTrim boards come with a 15-year transferable, limited warranty. H10r99•VI'Xcj ;tANNAN Y IN9fALJ,nol. co1.1PPlIF Your zip code has been saved as: 52240 Change your location: 52240 EC[ Theab. HardieZone products ara suited for your local climate. Learn more. n 9oaeds Rastic Thickness: 3/4" _. Weight: 3.9 lbs./sq. ft. r Length: 12- 500 Clark Street New trim @ addition Click here to view all products. Color Palette i.. an■■M I of 2 10/15/2012 2:00 PM HardieTrim http://www.james4P-'le.com/homeowner/products_ trim_hardietrim.py Batten Boards Smooth Thickness: 3/4" Weight: 3.9 lbs./sq. ft. rsriki e. u<�rcn. rranrtui• ✓ r� r 414 HardleTrlm® NT3- Boards Smooth Thickness: 3147 Weight: 4.35 lbs./sq. ft Legih: 12' Ow 3.50" 5.50" 7.25" 11.25" Color Palette ■E■ w� for paint to match color of existing painted meat siding 6/4 HardieTrim® NT3TM Boards Smooth _..........__.. _...... Thickness: 1" Color Palette or Weight: 5.65 lbs./sq. ft. fy' ■ Length: 12' 3.50" 4.50" 5.50" 7.25" 11.26' ■` ..... � 4.50" is only available in Arctic White in some areas. Copyright 2012 Contact Us I Terms & Conditions I Privacy Policy I Careers I Mobile Site James Hardie Building Products, Inc. 2 of 2 10/15/2012 2:00 PM n W C Q cc L N 3 O c 0 0 +% OD cz U O O N LO z 'FA x 3— 0 LZ F u I� o ON N iU %p aP OI co c o a t m CL L W 0 9 V a 3 2 � W c 0 M LA y M w 0 W a) n. as N o U � 0 C3 C ` 0 .+ y CM 3 o ov Y c 0 _m .— CD U O N 0 N Z Z .55 k_- R 3 0 0 E 0 H c d V m Z � O C 6.2 V a S 00 3 K W m M' ri S n1 M w 0 i� ry 3 a) Q cc Vl M .00 O U C o .3 CD E o 0 m N C Ua3 m _> a d 3 m O N 0 Qj N C n 'y a 10 W! o W M W O 500 Clark Street- J00B-ar1\T Siteline Clad Swinging Patio Doors Typical New Doors WINDOWS & DOORS Premium Wood from Porch & Deck QUICK SPEC GUIDE: SWINGING PATIO DOOR OPTIONAL FEATURES 6iHL�Es • bm" Hat, 23/32" or 1" Contour GBG • 7/8", 1-1/8", 1-3/8" Full Surround Wood Grilles SDL Bead Profile: • 7/8", 1-1/8", 1-38", 2-5116" with Light Bronze Shadow Bar • 7/8" 1-1/8" 1-3/8" 2-5/16" with Silver Shadow Bar SDL Putty Profile: • 5/8", 7/8", 1-1/8' with Light Bronze Shadow Bar • 5/8", 7/8", 1-1/8" with Silver Shadow Bar PANEL OPTIONS • Lock Rail Swing Door • Clad Pine Bottom Panel • 12" ADA Bottom Rail HARDWARE • Single Point (standard up to 7 2-1/2) • Multi -point optional on 7-3 heights and smaller • Multi -point (standard on"and over) • Multi -point (available on 6-2 and over) HANDLESET • Antique Brass • Polished Chrome • Oil Rubbed Bronze • Polished Brass • Brushed Chrome • Satin Nickel ` • Powder Coat White HINGES • In -Swing Hinges Match Handle Color • Adjustable Hinge Available • Out -Swing Hinges - Brushed Stainless Steel SILL • Dark bronze one-piece pulltruded fiberglass • ADA Sill Option and oak threshold • Pulltruded Fiberglass Adjustable Threshold HANDING • Viewed from the outside JAMB • 4A/16" • Minimum:4-9/16' j f Maximum In -Swing (Exterior): 9-1/16" it I• Exterior: Extruded Aluminum for In -Swing Doors • Maximum Out -Swing (Interior): 9-3/8" (one piece) I • Interior Pine for Out -Swing Doors I j SLIMEKKS • Fiberglass • Sliding screen available on In -Swing doors only f • Extruded Aluminum Frame • Hinged Screen available on In -Swing doors only SCREEN FRAME COLOR • Brilliant White Hartford Green I • Bronze - Hurter Green t • Chestnut Bronze Black I Heirloom White • Sage Brown • Desert Sand . Arctic Silver f • Bone White • Redwood • French Vanilla Dark Chocolate ! • Dark Buckskin • Sea Foam • Mesa Red • Smoke ivory ` • Mocha Cream • Cascade I • Commercial Grade Kynar 5300 Resin System Architectural Detail Manual August 2010 JELD-WEN reserves the right to change specifications without notice. Page 13-7 W c cc 104 E m C N c CD 15 ,� g co a U N N O O t U a, U N � O 0 m U a T gti a m � Y O U W N C � 06 Co N L U .2 -a o (OD Y c0 F O U) CCc UO 'a N Lo U iA C7 Q u O N E .x cu 2:, E sow GIJ Rf T N , O N N Q .. fa O f6 CcN f3 O N N C N �C> U a) U CU� '— O U tm U a O OL _ N N cu w C X E � U m a) f6 � h C 7 �� 0 Q O) tm V i N Q _ L R C L to 4) M L 0 O U T y M N NU) CCU O f0 C.0 Y U) N O w N C U N N T a)U) O � O N O Y0 fa + O O -( 7 a C fn 7 O i C C Y L N O O f6 C 2 u O O N 0 O O Ta E "m gCCMC U)CM � 1 ap f6 Q C o 6 w w 06 C0 o U U o m ; Z w O m (L T m L i w Z fA C z F O X LL as (`pd W li W LL x N x N x N N m N ii V/ XXX 0.. .. N b b X%X Ip fp Ip %%X f. fx m XX Ip (p % % X X X X X X % % LL X N W O Car' i-1;11. it01:,\"',I (:_..i 1.5 io V& MMIJAIW I 11 U 351 Date: November 8, 2013 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Cheryl Peterson, Preservation Consultant Re: Certificates of No Material Effect, Minor Reviews, and Intermediate Reviews The Historic Preservation Handbook requires a report to the HPC at each meeting of any projects that have been approved administratively. Below are the projects approved since the October report. Certificates of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff review 208 Fairchild Street - foundation repair 314 Church Street - repair porch flooring 404 E. Jefferson Street, St. Paul's Lutheran Chapel - masonry repair Minor Review — Pre -approved items — Staff review 228 S. Summit Street - window replacement 113 S. Johnson Street - window replacement 820 Ronalds Street - alterations to existing detached garage 228 Brown Street - radon mitigation 720 N. Van Buren Street - window replacement Intermediate Review — Chair and Staff review 514 N. Linn Street - minor revisions to approved COA for new garage 1126 E. Burlington Street - renovation/remodeling of existing kitchen addition MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2013 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Kate Corcoran, Frank Durham, Andrew Litton, Ginalie Swaim, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: David McMahon, Pam Michaud STAFF PRESENT: Chery Peterson OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) None. CALL TO ORDER: PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS 509 South Lucas Street Peterson said this property is in the Governor -Lucas Conservation District. She said an application for this same property was reviewed in July. Peterson showed photographs of the house, saying that it is a twin to the house on the left. She said the houses are mirror images of each other and share a driveway down the middle. Peterson said the porches each open on the opposite side of the driveway. Peterson said that at the time of the July meeting, the driveway with new concrete was completed as was the side step, but the owner had not done anything to the porch yet. She said there was a drainage problem with the basement window at the bottom of the porch stairs, and the owner was trying to figure out a way to solve that problem. Peterson said the owner wanted to move the stairs either to the front or the other side of the porch. She said staff had felt that would be inappropriate, and the Commission deferred its decision. Peterson said the owner did not understand what deferred meant, and he went ahead and did some work. Peterson said the owner cut into the solid railing that one sees on the porch. She said that when staff realized what had happened, he agreed to build it back. Peterson said the owner has done a good job of replacing that solid railing. She said it is new, but it looks like the old. Peterson said the owner has also reworked the porch steps, by building over the existing concrete steps that were there, to make them code compliant. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 10, 2013 Page 2 of 4 Peterson said the owner still needs to paint the porch steps and still needs to put in a simple pipe handrail. She said this project will then be done. Peterson said that this application is for window wells and an egress window. She stated that the window well seen in the front is one the owner has already put in and it is corrugated metal with landscape stones in front. Peterson said the owner realized it needs to be more substantial and will do it in poured concrete. Peterson said the other proposed window well, just around the corner to the north, is where the owner would like to put in an egress window, so the existing window opening would be made larger. She said staff is suggesting that this is appropriate, but some conditions would have to be met. Peterson said the first condition would be that the owner apply for an application to replace the basement windows. She said she recently observed that all of the basement windows were replaced over the summer, and there was no application. She said the replacement windows may or may not comply. Peterson said they appear to be sliding sash. Peterson showed a photograph taken a couple of months ago. She said one can see that the basement window on the south side is a new window. Peterson showed a photograph from when the Commission was looking at this house for the first time. She said one can see that same basement window then was the original basement window. Peterson said the original basement window on the east side was a three pane window with a storm window. She said it is now a modern sliding window, and she is not certain it fits the opening. Peterson said the owner will have to go through that review as a condition of approving this next amount of work. Peterson said the other condition of the egress window would be that a divided light pattern is used that will make sense with the basement windows as they are now, or will be, and confirming the dimensions of the window wells and confirming the construction materials. Regarding the proposed window wells and egress window, Peterson said she believes the owner could simply brick in the window on the front. Peterson said the front window is in the same room that will have the egress window, so there will be plenty of light. She said this would solve the water problem and the conflict between the window well and the steps and maybe even be a less expensive option. Peterson said she spoke to the owner, and is he agreeable to this. Wagner asked about the window on the driveway and said it looks like there is wood filled in top and bottom and that it really doesn't fit. Peterson said there are four points that are conditions to the next phase, and one of them is to go through the proper steps on the window replacement. Baldridge said there is then no change in the size of the window opening in front. Peterson confirmed this. She said that would not be changed, but the owner does need to tear out what has been done and put it back in a more permanent construction, which would be poured HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 10, 2013 Page 3 of 4 concrete with probably a course of brick on top to match the house. Peterson said she is advocating for just filling in the front window, saying it makes it a better entry. Baldridge asked, since the Commission is more sensitive about the front of a building in a district, to what extent should the Commission be opposed to this sort of brick reinforcement wall. Peterson said the problem with what is seen now is that it is loose; those stones are just stacked, and there is nothing holding them in place. She said that if those are moved, one will see the corrugated metal window well, which is not approved. Peterson said the owner will therefore have to go in and pour concrete. She said it will have to be torn out to make it right. Peterson said she knows that blocking in the window is a change to the historic window pattern but said that is part of the evolution here. Wagner said there is a good chance there is a window underneath the porch. MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 509 South Lucas Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: complete an Application for Historic Review for replacement of basement windows, for review and approval as required by zoning and building codes; provide Jeld-Wen egress window with simulated divided lights to match the light pattern of approved basement windows; confirm dimensions and all construction materials for both window wells; and provide all above information for review and approval by chair and staff. Litton seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (McMahon and Michaud absent. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: Swaim said these are listed in the packet. Peterson said she had nothing to add. DISCUSS ANNUAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS: Peterson said the selection committee will meet in half an hour. She said that Baldridge and Corcoran and Christine DenBerg from Friends of Historic Preservation will be at the meeting. Peterson said they will be looking at about a dozen projects at the meeting, but they are still gathering suggestions for nominations. She said the Awards presentation will be held November 21 at the Public Library with a reception at 5:00 and program at 5:30. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 12, 2013: MOTION: Wagner moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's September 12, 2013 meeting, as written. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:29 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte z 0 N N 0 ® 0 LLJ 0 QC LOU O Z P ® N 189 Z w L&l d H 0 F- U) a 0LLI c x X x x x x 0 X i x X x X X X X O O O I X ar X X X, LU O x X x O O to N X X X X x X X X I X n x x x x x X o x X o X n o o x o x X o x x x x co 1 X X X X X x 0 X x X O x x x x x o x x x o 0 x x X I i X x X X x x CO) M x x X I x - X x X X X X X i i x O O O O X o X x x i I x X X x X O CO) x x x i I o x x x o x X X X i i X I x x x X ox x x i i x X x x x cP W In C IL W W N c H M M M M M M M M M M! t ! !Z DIY 3 O� W Z zz Y = C O f1 Z R W Z 0 Z LL Z Z Z LL Q y LLT W Q O D d' Z 0' Gce O Z Q = �_ Q Z W W W R O 2 a r M U Q 00 m y F Q Q V 0 :3 m w Y